So, what does everyone think? I have yet to see any of this guy's work, so I really have no idea how he'll turn out.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Somebody I know tells me that he was in a BBC production of the Robert Harris book Archangel, but I didn't catch it.
He was also in Tomb Raider, but you'll have a hard time finding anybody who will admit having seen that.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
I don't know about the Bond actor, but they said Q won't appear in the next movie! That's just... wrong.
B.J.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I think he's too ugly to be Bond. Boxer's nose and a brawny mouth, almost Brian Thompson-like. He looked like a sweaty child-molester with a comb-over in "Road to perdition" and his voice sounds like Eric Roberts only more slithery. I don't even remember his performance in "Tomb Raider".
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I think he'll be good.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Give him the right hairdo, and I think he could work.
No Moneypenny... that's crap. The chick that was in the Pierce Brosnan movies was just smokin'. Judy Dench was an awesome M too... I hope she'll be back.
What happened to Brosnan, anyway? In my opinion he's the best Bond. Did he just not want to do it anymore? Of course, after the the last film with cloaking cars... who could really blame him?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Well, by all accounts either he said he didn't want to do anymore, or they said they didn't want to use him anymore. Then he definitely said he was open to doing more, and I think they indicated they were open to it as well. Then, finally, they dispensed with his services - by fax.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Maybe they are thinking about a return to a more icy and calculating Bond, like project: Timothy Dalton was intended to be after Moore the gentleman. I suppose I would prefer a rawer Bond to the excess of sportscars, gold watches and bimbos.
The name "Casino Royale" is a bit worrisome, though. Anyone know the plot?
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
My what a big gun he has.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nim: The name "Casino Royale" is a bit worrisome, though. Anyone know the plot?
quote:"Introducing James Bond: charming, sophisticated, handsome; chillingly ruthless and very deadly. This, the first of Fleming's tales of agent 007, finds Bond on a mission to neutralise a lethal, high-rolling Russian operative called simply 'Le Chiffre' - by ruining him at the baccarat table and forcing his Soviet spymasters to 'retire' him. It seems that lady luck is taken with James - Le Chiffre has hit a losing streak. But some people just refuse to play by the rules, and Bond's attraction to a beautiful female agent leads him to disaster and an unexpected saviour."
Doesn't sound much different than any other Bond movie. But I think one of the reasons they haven't done this one until now is because there was a Bond parody movie (in 1967) named "Casino Royale" based on this novel.
B.J.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Checked out some quotes from "Casino Royale" (1967) at imdb, I think I simply must get this movie.
- What are you going to do to me? - Physically, nothing, Mr Bond. - Oh I see, so you're going to nothing me to death!
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I wonder how they're going to pull off the whole Soviet thing... Unless this movie is going to take place during the Cold War...
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Maybe they're going to do an "Enterprise" and start shooting Bond prequels, shot in the era they were written. Would be nifty.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Or, every time they would have said "Soviets", they'll just replace it with "terrorists". You know, like Tom Clancy.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I think they have to go with Soviets- Goldeneye did a great job of bringing Bond into the post- Soviet era, but modern bad-guys just....suck. Today, everyone's in it for money or they are fanatics.
At least the Soviets could be in it for Bond's own reasons- patriotism, hot chicks, cool gadgets and the chance to remnorselessly kill someone that gets in your way....and make a witty quip about it after.
Plus, if they set the movie back in the 60's, they can use Felix Lighter (bond's old pal from the CIA in Connery's run). I thought he was a cool supporting character.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
During Brosnan's run, I swear that the guy played by Joe Don Baker (big guy, cowboy hat) was the new Felix, but I guess not. His character's name was Jack Wade. But he did seem to be playing the same role as Felix. (Interesting that he also played one of the Bond bad guys in "The Living Daylights".)
B.J.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
MITCHELL! Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
God bless you, sir.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
I liked seeing Mr. Blonde in Die Another Day.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
quote:he did seem to be playing the same role as Felix. (Interesting that he also played one of the Bond bad guys in "The Living Daylights".)
That was one of the stupidest things the Bond administration ever did. Not to mention introducing a "comic relief" character 90% into the movie, like anyone laughs at "Jimbo instead of James" wisecracks except children and the elderly.
Funny also, back in 1981 when Roger Moore kicked a bad guy's car off a cliff in "For your eyes only", people thought he was cruel and deliberate in his use of his "license to kill", and again in "Spy who loved me" when he emptied a whole clip into an unarmed Stromberg.
Nowadays that debate is all gone and people cheer when Brosnan puts a helpless media mogul under a large drilling crown to slowly turn him into roast beef. Classy. Halle Berry's contribution was even worse, shooting a doctor in the face and joking about it, then stabbing a girl in the chest with a broadsword and calling her "bitch" during her enemy's last, terrified and blood-gurgling breaths. Who's the bad guy again??
I hope this new Bond restores some dignity to the franchise, like most people seem to think Nolan did to Batman.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Actually, it wasn't the first example of re-using actors. Charles Gray appeared as a British agent in You Only Live Twice, and again two films later as Blofeld in Diamonds Are Forever. Maud Adams appeared as erstwhile Scaramanga babe in The Man with the Golden Gun, and as main love interest in Octopussy. Gray's first role is eminently forgetable, so seeing him in the second is excusable; but Adams shagged Bond in each role!
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Alright. I still maintain, though, that Joedon Baker was a stupid character in both incarnations. He wasn't even BadGuy enough to get properly killed by Dalton, he just made some statue fall on him or something. For all we know, Jedi Baker was put under the influence of mind-altering drugs and made to work for the good guys. Gasp! Sometimes I impress at least myself!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Anything with JoDon Baker is bound to be great...er crap!.
CRAP I SAY!
(ahem)
I've only sat through one of the Dalton movies, but it was bad. Not quite as horrible as Moonraker (the Threshold of Bond movies) but bad.
Drug dealers with a pet Great white shark that bites off the legs of Bond's pal? Yeaaaah....that's bad.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
But Licence to Kill (the film you refer to) had Wayne Newton, so it can't be all bad!
Seriously, The Living Daylights is the better of the two Dalton films; Licence to Kill was too ludicrous to be really good (though that tanker chase was great).
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I don't know which is which, but Dalton's first one had been written for Moore, or so I read on the internet.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: But Licence to Kill (the film you refer to) had Wayne Newton, so it can't be all bad!
Seriously, The Living Daylights is the better of the two Dalton films; Licence to Kill was too ludicrous to be really good (though that tanker chase was great).
As I recall, Bond's D.E.A agent pal is getting married (to a typical Bond-ish super babe), drug dealers crash the party, feed his legs to a Great white shark that is in a nearby tank, his new bride gets killed, Bond goes all out for revenge in a bad Chuck Norris imitation and then...the movie ends with Bond shaking hands with his hospitalized and VERY UPBEAT, now-crippled widower pal. Mabye it's the unending I.V. of morphine his pal will subsist on for the rest of his diminished, traumatized life that keeps him so Ned Flanders chipper.
Yet....it's still nowhere near as bad as Moonraker. I cant even laugh at that....thing.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Hey, Joe Don Baker was in Edge of Darkness. OK, he was annoying and crap in it, but I dispute the contention that anything he's in is crap by association.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Allright- even bad actors can be in good movies. Fuck, Halle Berry won an Oscar!
Go rent the MST3K episode Mitchell! Holy crap, you'll pee yourself laughing.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I still rank "Never say never again" as a Bond movie and that takes the top slot for worst Bond-movie, for me. Watching a grey-haired Connery push his face onto Kim Basinger's on that dance floor, with Connery wearing starched senior citizen's pants and suspenders, that was the shark jump.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Yes, Never Say Never Again was poor. Casino Royal (the Niven one) is quite good if you remeber that it is a spoof.
The book itself is a very gritty read, and could be made into a very good, cold movie. Trouble is, that they won't and it wll end up being a huge steamy pile of bats crap, just like the last two.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I don't know where all that Licence to Kill-hate came from, but I think it's the fourth best Bond film of them all, just beneath Goldeneye and From Russia With Love. (Just above Thunderball and The Spy Who Loved Me.)
I thought Dalton was the best Bond since Connery. And I really don't get why people liked Brosnan so damned much.
-MMoM Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
From Russia With Love is, in my opinion, seriously overrated. I'm sorry, but not much happens in it...and if I recall, they play the Bond theme when Bond is in his hotel room turning on lights and fluffing his pillow.
My favorite Bond films are Goldeneye, Goldfinger, and Diamonds Are Forever. The worst Bond films, I think, are The Man With the Golden Gun, A View to a Kill, and the aforementioned FRWL. Connery is the best Bond, followed by Brosnan, Dalton, and Moore. Lazenby made just one film, so he's like William Henry Harrison--he doesn't count (plus that's his one claim to fame).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I'd say you're definitely crazy here, Marshal. Goldfinger is *severely* overrated, and...Diamonds Are Forever??? Come on, what are you thinking here???
The theme was playing in the hotel in FRWL because it was one of Connery's signature things at that point to check the room for bugs (listening devices, not insects) and it was something that the audience anticipated. (Like the tossing of the hat on the rack.) He did it in Dr. No and Thunderball as well.
FRWL is a serious spy movie that (although it has its humorous moments as do all the films) was not dumbed down or played for schtick like many of the others, and was actually relevent to real-world politics of the period. Robert Shaw is also great in it and Daniela Bianchi is the epitome of a HOT RUSSIAN MAMA! Plus it had THE ATTACHE CASE! And that HELICOPTER SEQUENCE! What's not to like?
By the way, I see I made a mistake in my above post. Either I meant to call Licence To Kill the THIRD best of the films, or I meant to place Thunderball above it instead of below it. Just thinking about it offhand, I can't decide which.
-MMoM Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
The Honerable Member for Mim is right.
Consider yourself bitchslaped Veers for even thinking, let alone saying that Diamonds are Forever is better than From Russia With Love.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)